EVOLUTION OF A COST-UTILITY MODEL OF DONEPEZIL FOR ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to describe the evolution of a cost-utility model used to inform the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's (NICE) most recent decisions on the cost-utility of drug treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD), and to explore the impact of structural assumptions on the cost-utility results. METHODS Changes informed by noted limitations of the decision model used in NICE's previous decisions (in 2006) were made cumulatively to the original decision model for donepezil compared with best supportive care (for patients with mild to moderate AD). Deterministic and probabilistic analyses were undertaken for each cumulative change of the model. The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) of parameter estimates and structural assumptions was also calculated. RESULTS Cumulative changes to the decision model highlighted how the results of the original model (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £81,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained) related to those of the new model (where donepezil was estimated to be cost-saving), mainly due to uncertainty in the incremental cost of donepezil treatment over best supportive care (ranging from -£600 to £3,000 per patient). The partial EVPI analysis reflected this finding where further information on treatment discontinuations and cost parameter estimates were shown to be valuable in terms of reducing decision uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS Assessing the evolution of the cost-utility model helped to identify and explore structural differences between cohort-based models and is likely to be useful for decision models in other disease areas. This approach makes the structural uncertainty explicit, forcing decision makers to address structural uncertainty in addition to parameter uncertainty.

[1]  Karl Claxton,et al.  Characterizing structural uncertainty in decision analytic models: a review and application of methods. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[2]  M. Albert,et al.  Predicting time to nursing home care and death in individuals with Alzheimer disease. , 1997, JAMA.

[3]  H. Lemij,et al.  Surveillance for ocular hypertension: an evidence synthesis and economic evaluation. , 2012, Health technology assessment.

[4]  A. Gray,et al.  Estimating the relationship between disease progression and cost of care in dementia , 2002, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[5]  E. Loveman,et al.  Modelling the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in the management of mild to moderately severe Alzheimer’s disease , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[6]  M Jeffreys,et al.  The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (review of Technology Appraisal No. 111): a systematic review and economic model. , 2012, Health technology assessment.

[7]  E. Loveman,et al.  The clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for Alzheimer's disease. , 2006, Health technology assessment.

[8]  J. Caro,et al.  Assessment of health economics in Alzheimer’s disease (AHEAD) based on need for full-time care , 2001, Neurology.

[9]  J. Caro,et al.  NICE Cost-Effectiveness Appraisal of Cholinesterase Inhibitors , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[10]  Karl Claxton,et al.  Exploring Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[11]  K Claxton,et al.  The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. , 1999, Journal of health economics.

[12]  M. Albert,et al.  Assessing patient dependence in Alzheimer's disease. , 1994, Journal of gerontology.

[13]  Denis Getsios,et al.  Cost Effectiveness of Donepezil in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.